Professions of faith don’t signal successful congregations

The Rev. Kim Cape told the Southwest Texas Annual Conference session that each congregation should have at least one profession of faith a year (“All churches should have professions of faith, dean says,” June 23).
“Just what the doctor ordered to heal an ailing church,” some may think. Her impassioned proposal has merit in that it is thought-provoking. At least it got me thinking.
Cape’s goal to devise a cure for an ailing, aging church, losing weight before our eyes, is sensible. There is nothing wrong with that goal. But a quota system is a bad idea. Quota systems are potentially divisive and inherently unfair. Her prescription is not sound.
The idea that the worth of a congregation and its pastor should be measured largely by numbers of new professions of faith is troublesome. Certainly we all rejoice with a new profession of faith. It is truly a moment of awe.
But those moments are not easily come by for some churches. The dynamic of demographics will largely dictate who will come forward in our churches, not the power of a preacher or the care of a congregation.
A small church in a county with a stable or declining population, much of it aging, is not a failure simply because it has a stable or declining membership. Nor is a large metropolitan church necessarily a success because it has a constant infusion of new young families.
Certainly there is comfort and reassurance with measurable growth. Would that all our churches enjoyed “good numbers.” But demographics are insurmountable.
Some rural churches will surely disappear from the landscape just as did the country store. Others will limp along with little growth. To imply that those pastors and congregations that don’t meet a rigid and arbitrary quota are ineffective and failures seems patently unreasonable.
Let’s remember that a successful ministry is still largely unquantifiable: providing spiritual guidance, comfort to the sick and troubled, and Christian fellowship. A statistical “widow’s mite,” if you will.
United Methodists aren’t facing an either/or situation. There is value in small rural churches with little growth as well as large churches in the sprawling cities. We want and need both.
So I say forget the quota system. Too potentially divisive, too inherently unfair.
We need to help all congregations, large and small, and their pastors develop skills to make The United Methodist Church more relevant, especially to younger families. Here are a couple of suggestions:
> Organize gatherings of small teams from similar-sized churches in a retreat setting. Bring in skilled people to teach ways to reach, educate, involve and inspire prospective church members. It could be a time to uplift, excite, and foster warm, welcoming and enthusiastic people sitting in the pews.
> Address the growth problem early in seminary training. Provide effective, formal training in how to appeal to young families—whatever the locale. Provide continuing training to experienced, well-established pastors to enhance their skills. Encourage pastors of all ages to visit dynamic programs already in place in the huge churches, particularly the non-Methodist ones, to get entirely new viewpoints.
Those ideas are just starters. We are defining and understanding the problem. Finding answers is the next step. The cure will not be found in a quota system!